NATO v.s. USSR

Like many people here in the past, I want to create a post world war II scenario for axis and allies where its NATO v.s. USSR. I would be basing this variant off of AAG 1940, but i need some ideas, suggestions and criticism.

1. All countries will be playable from AAG 1940 except for Germany, Italy, Japan.

2. Communist Party of China will be a playable side and if successful in conquering China will be able to build regular Units like any other country. (ex Aircraft carries ext…)

3. Some sort of Nuke rules…for balance sake I am thinking there should be a limit in the number of nukes allowed to be used

4. (And perhaps the rule i need help most with) Some sort of uprising rule. Ex. West Indies (Cuba) and other countries can come under attack from guerrillas? and if they are successful take sides with however sponsored them? I may be going a little over board but any feed back would be appreciated.

If you want to avoid the confusion of Nuke rules you can have the scenario represent Operation Unthinkable, a plan by Churchill to invade the soviet union in 1945. Could be USSR, Japan, Com China Vs America, Britain, Nat china, maybe France. I always did want to see a good cold war version of AA, good luck with it.

Depending on the time frame in which you set your game, the answers to your four points might vary. For instance:

NATO was founded in April 1949. The People’s Republic of China was established in October 1949. So the two requirements of “NATO v.s. USSR” and “Communist Party of China will be a playable side and if successful in conquering China” would restrict your time frame to a fairly narrow window if you want both at the same time. A large-scale Nationalist-versus-Communist conflict in China would probably have to be mainly set in 1946-to-1948, which is pre-NATO, because by 1949 Mao’s Communists were probably getting the upper hand of Chiang’s Nationalists.

One way of putting a limiting factor on nukes is by choosing the time period that will give you the degree of limitation that you want. Initially, the US had a total monopoly on atomic bombs, and had a very limited number of them in stock. Then the Soviets and the British and the French and the Chinese got into the act (I can’t recall in which order). And the hydrogen bomb eventually came along too, and raised nuclear capabilities to a whole new level. Delivery systems also evolved: first bombers, followed later by various missile types, with nuclear artillery also being experimented upon. In other words, nuclear warfare capabilities become very different over time as you move forward from 1945, so you have several models from which to choose.

Similarly, the period in which you set your game might let you choose the type of guerrilla activity (or the specific insurgency war) you prefer. The insurgencies of the post-1945 period blended (to various degrees) elements of proxy warfare between the Western and Eastern power blocks with elements of anti-colonial national-liberation and/or national unification movements – Korea and Vietnam being two examples. It might depend on whether you want these conflicts to be supplementary elements on the fringes of (let’s say) a full-scale NATO/Warsaw Pact war in central Europe, or whether you want them to be the focus of the game, or whether you want them to serve as the initial trigger of a wider conflict.

Depending on the time frame in which you set your game, the answers to your four points might vary. For instance:

NATO was founded in April 1949. The People’s Republic of China was established in October 1949. So the two requirements of “NATO v.s. USSR” and “Communist Party of China will be a playable side and if successful in conquering China” would restrict your time frame to a fairly narrow window if you want both at the same time. A large-scale Nationalist-versus-Communist conflict in China would probably have to be mainly set in 1946-to-1948, which is pre-NATO, because by 1949 Mao’s Communists were probably getting the upper hand of Chiang’s Nationalists.

One way of putting a limiting factor on nukes is by choosing the time period that will give you the degree of limitation that you want. Initially, the US had a total monopoly on atomic bombs, and had a very limited number of them in stock. Then the Soviets and the British and the French and the Chinese got into the act (I can’t recall in which order). And the hydrogen bomb eventually came along too, and raised nuclear capabilities to a whole new level. Delivery systems also evolved: first bombers, followed later by various missile types, with nuclear artillery also being experimented upon. In other words, nuclear warfare capabilities become very different over time as you move forward from 1945, so you have several models from which to choose.

Similarly, the period in which you set your game might let you choose the type of guerrilla activity (or the specific insurgency war) you prefer. The insurgencies of the post-1945 period blended (to various degrees) elements of proxy warfare between the Western and Eastern power blocks with elements of anti-colonial national-liberation and/or national unification movements – Korea and Vietnam being two examples. It might depend on whether you want these conflicts to be supplementary elements on the fringes of (let’s say) a full-scale NATO/Warsaw Pact war in central Europe, or whether you want them to be the focus of the game, or whether you want them to serve as the initial trigger of a wider conflict.

You bring up very good points CWO Marc, I am now considering a name change for the variant. Would Allies v.s. USSR make more sense? As for the time frame, I am now leaning towards a 1946 scenario. I would prefer this because the units being used in the game are that of AAG and now that I think about it a 1949 would make some of those units obsolete…Okay another question I have is should Germany, Italy, Japan have any part in this? or should their original territories be occupied by allied markers? One other obstacle I am facing is what to do with nuetrals and other territories the allies did not officially occupy militarily ex. Norway, Dutch East Indies, and a couple other I can not name off the back. I appreciate your post CWO Marc, I see now this variant will require much more reasearch than I anticipated. If anyone has a link to post World War II army strengths, and where they were stationed I would appreciate it.

You bring up very good points CWO Marc, I am now considering a name change for the variant. Would Allies v.s. USSR make more sense? As for the time frame, I am now leaning towards a 1946 scenario. I would prefer this because the units being used in the game are that of AAG and now that I think about it a 1949 would make some of those units obsolete…Okay another question I have is should Germany, Italy, Japan have any part in this? or should their original territories be occupied by allied markers? One other obstacle I am facing is what to do with nuetrals and other territories the allies did not officially occupy militarily ex. Norway, Dutch East Indies, and a couple other I can not name off the back. I appreciate your post CWO Marc, I see now this variant will require much more reasearch than I anticipated. If anyone has a link to post World War II army strengths, and where they were stationed I would appreciate it.

The immediate post-war period would indeed be an interesting time in which to set a wargame. As you say, it would allow the use of A&A sculpts, perhaps with a sprinkling of a few more advanced units supplemented by other games. And as I mentioned, it would put pretty tight limits on the nukes. (You might want to do some background reading on Operation Crossroads, the first post-war atomic bomb tests – you may find the information useful.)

Politically, 1946 was an interesting time. Russia and the Western powers we still technically allies, but Cold War strains were already appearing. The points you raise about whether Japan and Germany should be used, and if so how, fits right into this issue. The U.S. position, from August 1945 onward, was that Japan was in the U.S. sphere of interest and that Russia should stay clear of it. As for Germany (which is conveniently divided into eastern and western portions on the Global 1940 map), its postwar division into Soviet, American, British and French occupation zones made it (and particularly Berlin) into an obvious possible flashpoint in East/West relations – the Berlin Blockage crisis of 1948-1949 being an early eample. There was also a lot of instability in places like Greece, which looked for a while as if it might tip into the Communist camp. One element potentially affecting Italy is that the situation in Trieste took a while to sort out; Churchill even mentioned it in the famous 1946 speech in which he said that “From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic an “iron curtain” has descended across the Continent.”

One place where you could get some good inspiration for your scenario would be the book “What If? : The World’s Foremost Military Historians Imagine What Might Have Been”, edited by Robert Cowley. It includes, as I recall, speculation on how the Chinese Civil War might have turned out very differently, and on how the Cold War might have turned hot in Berlin.

Suggested Topics

@Yavid:
nations with an “old bb” piece from HBG I’ve replaced improved mech inf. tech with heavy battleship tech. HBG become the standard BB and used at set up and can be purchased until you get the tech. After you get the tech you can buy the OOB battleships as heavy battleships. These Heavy Battleships are 4/4/2/20 units just like standard but take 3 hits to sink and roll two dice in combat taking the best roll and using it.
Interesting idea, though I’m not sure if I want to make it a “tech” thing, especially since all the nations had new BB’s already in production before the war started. I’d be more inclined to make it a “tech” ability to create a TRUE SBB along the lines of Yamato, Montana or H-class (and perhaps Sovietsky Soyuz, and, perhaps even more arguably Iowa, Vanguard and Lion), of which the Yamato is the only one we’re likely to have a piece for any time soon (and of which only the Yamato was ever actually built)… I might try something along these lines, along with maybe a “super-cruiser” and/or “super-carrier” tech if and when I ever decide to try using some of my painted NAVWAR or Panzerschiffe pieces on a very big map like GW1939… but I don’t see the likelihood of having AA-scale pieces of any of the other true SBB’s any time soon.
Another idea: perhaps old BB’s could be a 3/4/2 unit or a 4/3/2 unit; the rationale here is that the “real world” speed difference may not be enough to make a difference in the category of strategic mobility (which is what speed really represents in game terms, and most especially on the smaller board versions) but rather that the old/new speed difference should be understood as more an issue of “tactical” mobility which could put old BB’s in a combat disadvantage on either defense or offense? If so, though, in which of the two would the lack of tactical mobility be more important? I’m leaning toward it being a bigger disadvantage on offense, but I’d be interested in hearing other opinions.
In any case, keep in mind, for all of you out there who plan to use some sort of “old BB” house rules, that classic BB pieces are about perfect for this while we’re waiting for HBG to get to all of the nations’ version of one. Similarly, the classic version’s carriers are almost perfect for generic CVE’s. Variable or Coach, do you guys have classic pieces available for these two unit types for most of the relevant nations for those who don’t have oodles of them lying around?

yeah i read earlier fmg say that they had the 2 US tanks sculpts already. but i was wondering if you use 2 fighters such as mustang and the F4U and make one into a dive bomber would they still be scaled as fighters

May I suggest a possible infantry change based on historic facts. Russians had more men, Germans had better equipment and training for their troops not to mention their skill at combined arms tactics. So, why not let the Russians have their cheap infantry buys while giving the Germans a bonus in attack strength, say 2 in attack and 2 in defense when combined with armor or air units, ( no need for Artillary). Now that is what I call an easy fix. Since the germans start out with more tanks and planes than thier opponents they will kick butt early. But when the allies start to build up their combined arms, Germany will be overwhelmed in numbers. So the axis better do a lot of damage real quick to win.
Should be more fun though.
If someone does play-test this in a game could they let me know how it worked out? Thanks.
:roll: Crazy Ivan
If something doesn’t work right,
fix it!
I can’t help it, I’m left handed

@knp7765:
@Yavid:
I would want KV-1, PE-8, SU-100, SU-152, another art. piece, some kind of Jet Fighter,
There is going to be a KV-1 in the Kursk Game HBG is working on.
In the Allied Super Weapons expansion for Global they are going to have a Russian heavy artillery piece and I think a MiG 9 jet fighter.
I don’t know about the other three.
Yeah I know but until I have the pieces in my hands, I’m going to keep asking for them

Okay gang,
Paul and I are going to start two separate projects from this point forward. Paul will do his best to preserve the info from this thread as it pertains to his game which you can follow here:
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=24848.0
As far as my game (simplified version using more or less OOB pieces) you can follow it in this thread:
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=24875.0
Thank you everyone and we both encourage full participation and idea sharing in both our ventures. As Paul says, we want to have MORE FUN!

Sorry guys,
I think I misunderstood the question. I meant that G40 had enough different unit types to cover the units in the game. But you are correct Empireman, pieces would need to be painted to have enough colors. Or, you could buy some other colored pieces. Playable powers are France, UK, Russia, Italy, Serbia, Germany, Austria-Hungary, Ottomans, Japan, USA, China, ANZAC. Serbia and China have no Air or Naval ability.